Moderating Mapleafweb's Moderation

[GostHacked]

Then the post it's in response to is also a troll post.

Not at all, since we are talking about moderating this forum, discussing trolling and the trollers is part of it.

If you want to talk about basic logic.

Edited June 16, 2014 by GostHacked

[Shady]

Not at all, since we are talking about moderating this forum, discussing trolling and the trollers is part of it.If you want to talk about basic logic.

Complete nonsense. Taking passive-aggressive shots at people you regard as trolls is only going to warrant responses. I guess when you're the one doing the trolling, it's not so bad huh?

[jacee]

Then the post it's in response to is also a troll post.

Not.

I was pointing out that ignoring a persistent troll doesn't help if he/she manages to derail the whole thread and shift it to his agenda.

.

[bush_cheney2004]

As previously clarified, it is not "trolling" if other members respond in kind. Perhaps one should get better organized and disciplined when pursuing "The Great Troll Hunt".

[guyser]

Perhaps one should get better organized and disciplined when pursuing "The Great Troll Hunt".

Considering the source, please do tell us about trolls. Wrote the book did you ?

[jbg]

It's difficult when a troll persistently derails every topic to his preferred topic of 'US good-Canada bad'.

.

I have noticed the member in question hasn't posted in awhile. Was he banned or suspended?

I think it's obvious he's a one-trick pony.

Not this time. I assume you're referring to me. I was suspended for most of March 2013 and then had a three day suspension more recently.

Too bad so sad that you wanted me gone (unless it wasn't about me).

[waldo]

Not this time. I assume you're referring to me. I was suspended for most of March 2013 and then had a three day suspension more recently.

Too bad so sad that you wanted me gone (unless it wasn't about me).

why is everyone always singling you out? Or are they... was/is this about you?

.

[waldo]

Trolling is subjective term.

thanks scoop! And the outstanding requests for MLW's subjective detail/definition of a troll/trolling remains outstanding... not detailed, not defined!

.

[jacee]

Not this time. I assume you're referring to me. I was suspended for most of March 2013 and then had a three day suspension more recently.

Too bad so sad that you wanted me gone (unless it wasn't about me).

I wasn't talking about you.

.

[Bob Macadoo]

thanks scoop! And the outstanding requests for MLW's subjective detail/definition of a troll/trolling remains outstanding... not detailed, not defined!.

Subjectivity becomes less and less an issue if more and more of the population have the same viewpoint....

[waldo]

Subjectivity becomes less and less an issue if more and more of the population have the same viewpoint....

yes, clearly... factoring in all those that have (and will) throw in the towel and leave given the preponderance of trolls/trolling "being provocative... often with a positive effect of engaging on-topic responses --- sometimes with comedic effect."

[Charles Anthony]

I mean, if you were to dash off a one line message to the complainant acknowledging their existence and saying you had spoke/written/dealt with to the offender that would be pretty much that.

We do.

And as for claims, what do you do as a moderator when SEVERAL members make the complaint about the same member?

I consider each one on its own individual merit.

as you acknowledge trolling exists, why do you continue to ignore the troll(s)?

Ignore? What do you mean by that???? Please define your terms because I do not trust you and I are using the same language.

I read nearly everything each one of you writes here --- minus a lot of the television, sports and the rest of the entertainment discussions. Yet, I do not participate in any of your discussions. Help me understand what the word IGNORE means to you as you question my actions.

HERE IS A CLUE: There is a little bitty troll in each one of you, as far as I can tell.

a simple request; once again for clarity and commonality of understanding: please define/relate your understanding of what a (MLW board) troll is, what (MLW board) trolling is - thanks in advance.

Answered already up above:

A troll acts to disrupt a forum and or to stifle discussion and or to propagate misinformation.

What do you think of this recent one?

The 'trolling' charge is meaningless and is only used when the person making the charge has no comeback.

yes, clearly... factoring in all those that have (and will) ....

....come sneaking back in through the kitchen window?

I don't how/if they could have a nuanced definition….As I’ve said, it’s clearly a subjective term……

so what if it's subjective...

Good. We agree the definition is subjective. Let us move on.

You ask: "So what?" Well, the subjectivity of the definition is critical because it means you are asking the wrong question. The question you SHOULD be asking is "When and how should a moderator intervene here at MLW?"

ANSWER: As little as possible because if you stop feeding trolls, they go away.

Before intervening, I ask a few questions starting with "Can these guys sort it out on their own without me lifting a finger?" and 99% of the time the answer is "Yes, you can.... if you want." Then I ask myself: "Is there even a sliver of a possibility that the alleged-infraction-post offers one iota of a contribution to the discussion??" and again, 99% of the time the answer is "Yes, there is."

I see a glimmer of hopeful merit in each one of your posts --- including the inflammatory ones. Very few of your opinions are "better" than any other member's opinion. I see "merit" in a discussion that exposes and or explains different views more thoroughly. You all have different views and you each express them in different interesting ways.

The 2nd questions I ask are "What harm will my censorship create? Will I stifle a burgeoning view that is about to be expressed?" and I balance it with "What good will my intervention make? that could not otherwise be achieved without censorship?" The balance is usually tipped in favor of non-censorship because as much as some of you get up in arms against alleged-trolls, you still happen to further the discussion and debate --- I bet unwittingly so. I, for one, usually want to keep reading uncensored discussion even if you do not.

For those of you who refuse to ignore alleged-trolls, I suggest that you make an effort to understand opposing views for curiosity's sake rather than try to argue or shut them down. It is easier. Try to come to agreements on issues of fact and less on normative/policy prescriptions. If you must, ask "How do you, Mr. Troll, expect to convince us of X, Y and or Z?" Make your "troll" work harder.

Avoid making things personal, too, by the way. That always helps.

[Bonam]

The 2nd questions I ask are "What harm will my censorship create? Will I stifle a burgeoning view that is about to be expressed?" and I balance it with "What good will my intervention make? that could not otherwise be achieved without censorship?" The balance is usually tipped in favor of non-censorship because as much as some of you get up in arms against alleged-trolls, you still happen to further the discussion and debate --- I bet unwittingly so. I, for one, usually want to keep reading uncensored discussion even if you do not.

Indeed. I very much agree with erring on the side of less censorship. As for the "troll" being alluded to by most of the posters here... while he does tend to deflect threads to a particular topic not necessarily related to what they are about, he posts civilly and avoids hurling insults, which is more than what can be said for many of the posters complaining about said "troll". It is entirely the thread participants choice whether to engage discussion on alternate topics and follow tangents or not, so thread drift is the fault not only of the "troll" but of other thread participants as well.

[Smallc]

I've sent very few reports, but I've never received an acknowledgment.

[cybercoma]

If you're going to lock the improvements thread, you might want to delete the announcement too.

[Michael Hardner]

I've sent very few reports, but I've never received an acknowledgment.

Have you reported something recently ? Charles hasn't been doing this from the beginning but I have definitely seen him respond, especially if the report deserves a considerable amount of thought.

[Smallc]

I don't know exactly when it was - not all that long ago, thought I don't send many reports - I couldn't answer since I was being disciplined.

[monty16]

I don't know exactly when it was - not all that long ago, thought I don't send many reports - I couldn't answer since I was being disciplined.

If those who feel they at liberty to discuss their discipline would provide details then the rest of us would be able to get some idea of what is going to be tolerated and what is not. At the moment it's just a crapshoot.

[Big Guy]

If those who feel they at liberty to discuss their discipline would provide details then the rest of us would be able to get some idea of what is going to be tolerated and what is not. At the moment it's just a crapshoot.

I already have a pretty good idea. I believe that civil discussion has always been the norm for interaction between normal people. The same principal can be applied on an anonymous board. The only difference is that in the virtual medium, the offender does not have the potential restraint of a threatened face plant.

Personally, I have no difficulty differentiating between what is acceptable and what is not - on this board.

[monty16]

I already have a pretty good idea. I believe that civil discussion has always been the norm for interaction between normal people. The same principal can be applied on an anonymous board. The only difference is that in the virtual medium, the offender does not have the potential restraint of a threatened face plant.

Personally, I have no difficulty differentiating between what is acceptable and what is not - on this board.

I'm saying it's a crapshoot for good reason but I won't air it in public because I don't think that's the right thing to do. However, if the mods are reading here they could ask me in private what I'm talking about.

In any case, it doesn't seem to be necessary as my most current complaints have obviously been acted upon. I'm not expecting anything more for now.

[monty16]

Rules I have missed but to which I have just recently been iinformed. And rules that I think make a lot of sense and should be adhered to by all members from now on in a strict manner.

DO NOT THINK OF THE NAMES OF YOUR FELLOW MEMBERS AS YOU READ THE POSTS IN A DISCUSSION. THINK OF EVERY SINGLE POST AS IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHO WROTE IT.

Let there be no mistake of where the guilt lies for breaking the rules and let there be no mistake that a breach of the rules should be reported!

Then there will be no ambiguity on whether or not the guilty parties are being punished for such bad behaviour.

I'm with the moderator team 100% on this one!

[On Guard for Thee]

Rules I have missed but to which I have just recently been iinformed. And rules that I think make a lot of sense and should be adhered to by all members from now on in a strict manner.

DO NOT THINK OF THE NAMES OF YOUR FELLOW MEMBERS AS YOU READ THE POSTS IN A DISCUSSION. THINK OF EVERY SINGLE POST AS IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHO WROTE IT.

Let there be no mistake of where the guilt lies for breaking the rules and let there be no mistake that a breach of the rules should be reported!

Then there will be no ambiguity on whether or not the guilty parties are being punished for such bad behaviour.

I'm with the moderator team 100% on this one!

Thats just a bunch of blah blah blah. Nobody cares who wrote it, they respond to what was written. Retorts come when someone thinks a post was silly, wrong, or whatever. If you happen to get a lot of those, get over it.

[monty16]

I haven't got the slightest idea of what you are babbling on about. Take your complaints up with the moderators and stop spamming me with your garbage.

[jacee]

Let there be no mistake of where the guilt lies for breaking the rules and let there be no mistake that a breach of the rules should be reported!

monty I've been giving you reminders about personal slams to others in your posts instead of reporting you.

Make sure your own house is in order before reporting others, or it will come back to bite you.

.

[Argus]

Let there be no mistake of where the guilt lies for breaking the rules and let there be no mistake that a breach of the rules should be reported!

"gosthacked, then it's settled!l You are joining the pond scum and going with Zionist supporters."

Does the above sound familiar, monty? It's from yesterday, I believe.